Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!

Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Based on positive member feedback, the updated STR rules published in the August Fastrack are considered final, and are effective 1/1/2010

Looks like "piggybacks" are out for member feedback in ST:

Quote:

The STAC would like feedback on opening up 14.10.F to allow ECU “piggybacks” that directly control or modify engine functions such as fuel injectors and ignition timing (ignitor, coil, etc). Current allowances restrict piggybacks to acting only as “signal modifiers” on the ECU inputs. Direct control would be restricted to fuel, ignition, and VTEC switchover points. Sensors must be OE. Emissions legality as defined in Appendix F and 14.10 would still need to be maintained, which means that OBDII systems must be intact and operating as the manufacturer intended. NOTE: The goal with this proposal is to allow an alternative, cost-effective method of performing the same functions allowed by current rules. This is not final rules language. This proposal would be effective 1/2011.

Another anti-awd fanboi shot down?

Quote:

The STAC believes that the Street Touring classes have accounted for AWD versus 2WD differences by properly classing cars and using restrictions such as tire sizes. Currently there are no issues which would suggest a change. (ref. 09-413)

What would qualify as a "piggyback" that directly controls injectors/coils/etc? MS? That will free up a fair amount of power on cars w/o good ECU support (old 2.5RS for example).

Quote:

The following previously-published (October ’08) class change proposal has been recommended by the SPAC and is published
here for further comment: Move from DSP to FSP, Saturn 16V models as follows (ref. 09-532):
Saturn
S-series(’91-’95)
S-series (’96-’02)

Street Touring: Per the STAC, OE bumper covers may be modified as part of the “Body Kit” allowance (14.2.F), including cutting
holes for the passage of air. NOTE: The STAC is looking to rework or remove 14.2.F for 2011, since its original “Sport Compact” cosmetic intent is no longer relevant and it is being primarily used instead for performance benefit.

Thanks Cy (sarcastic) , now I can't get the C West Shogun style front bumper. I could have gotten made performance benefits from it... JK.

Seriously though, as is, the "passage of air" language is confusing, especially as it could apply to intake air.

Don't forget about the Emanage Ultimate, which directly controls the injectors. I would have used this on the Spec V when I had it so that I could bump up the redline and adjust timing to gain extra benefits. But as the rules were, I could only use and SAFC for A/F only. I'm okay with this change, allows cars without much support to actually utilize the ruleset for cheap.

As for the AWD/2WD deal, I would like to see them allow STX to use 9" wide wheels, but keep the tire rules at 245mm. I think that would be fair now that the WRX has been slayed.

As for the AWD/2WD deal, I would like to see them allow STX to use 9" wide wheels, but keep the tire rules at 245mm. I think that would be fair now that the WRX has been slayed.

Obviously I'm on the 2wd Wankel side of this argument, but I disagree...respectfully.

Not to take anything away from Bauer or Coleman, but if Fenter/McCance/Brooks was still in a STX WRX this year, I'm pretty sure we would have seen one at the top. If anything, awd cars should petition a wheel width increase to 8.5" to better utilize the 245 sized tire they've been given. 9" is just not going to happen.

FWIW, if I owned a 2.0L WRX (as opposed to the RX-8), I'd still build it for the class. I think the WRX, BMWs and RX-8's all have a very fair shot at winning the class as it currently sits.

Don't forget about the Emanage Ultimate, which directly controls the injectors. I would have used this on the Spec V when I had it so that I could bump up the redline and adjust timing to gain extra benefits. But as the rules were, I could only use and SAFC for A/F only. I'm okay with this change, allows cars without much support to actually utilize the ruleset for cheap.

Would the Megasquirt qualify? Not sure how they are calling any of this "piggyback" other than OBD2 systems need to remain intact.

But you have to admit, the RX-8 or BMW look to be better "cars to have" in Lincoln. As long as it's dry of course.

I personally don't see it that way. I think Meredith and Isley drove better in Lincoln than Coleman and Bauer. Weather definitely would play a major factor, but I don't see the WRXs out of the equation even in the dry.

Imho, b/c WRXs don't have the fancy diffs of the STi's & Evos in STU, you have to set them up to be loose and know how to drive them sideways. That's what McCance is really good at doing all day long. I've personally seen Greg go into a sweeper really hot, have his back-end step out 'significantly', and use this to excute a perfect diamond line through the turn, and come haulin' out of the corner on-boost! They don't teach that kinda driving at autocross school...but that's the level car control it takes to win in an STX WRX.

I personally don't see it that way. I think Meredith and Isley drove better in Lincoln than Coleman and Bauer. Weather definitely would play a major factor, but I don't see the WRXs out of the equation even in the dry.

Imho, b/c WRXs don't have the fancy diffs of the STi's & Evos in STU, you have to set them up to be loose and know how to drive them sideways. That's what McCance is really good at doing all day long. I've personally seen Greg go into a sweeper really hot, have his back-end step out 'significantly', and use this to excute a perfect diamond line through the turn, and come haulin' out of the corner on-boost! They don't teach that kinda driving at autocross school...but that's the level car control it takes to win in an STX WRX.

My $0.02... (I've been know to be wrong more times than I'm right. )

You'll have to get some seat time in a well setup STX WRX. I'll bet you'll be faster in a the RX8. A few people I know have had similar experiences when jumping from their STX WRX to a STX RX8. Until you've had decent seat time in either cars, it's difficult to form an opinion.

You'll have to get some seat time in a well setup STX WRX. I'll bet you'll be faster in a the RX8. A few people I know have had similar experiences when jumping from their STX WRX to a STX RX8. Until you've had decent seat time in either cars, it's difficult to form an opinion.

Not saying you are wrong, just some food for thought.

Rob

Where did you/they find a well set up one to compare with? So far they seem pretty rare.

STX as a whole was slow, right now a Honda looks like the best car.

And wait till the BMW's get developed. Your 2009 STX champ was on stock brakes, and had a stock header.

didn't see the Safety stuff either and the Safety Belt is still from August. More than likely its a reiteration of keeeping people out of trailers when in motion and possible looking at "racetracks" used as autoX sites.

Coleman and Bauer spent a day switching between the WRX and George Hudetz's RX8. 16 runs each, so lots of time to be familiar with the course. Enough runs in the RX8 to be comfortable.

Right. I asked where they found a well set up RX-8, not a BSTX car. Coleman was so convinced the RX-8 was going to kill the class he was over before he got started. Meanwhile he ignored the car that has always been there - you know, the one with TQ - just waiting for a proper size tire.